Key Points – While Russia displays captured Western tanks like the M1 Abrams and Leopard 2 as propaganda trophies, this narrative obscures a crucial point: the remarkable crew survivability of these platforms.
-An interview with a Ukrainian Abrams commander from the 47th Mechanized Brigade revealed his crew survived 4-6 direct hits inside their disabled tank without injury, thanks to features like separated ammunition storage.
-The West often provides older or downgraded equipment to Ukraine, which operates without the full air support and extensive training NATO forces would have, making some vehicle losses unsurprising.
-For Ukraine, a disabled tank with a surviving crew is a tactical win.
What Happens When Russia Captures Western Tanks?
Tanks, armored vehicles, and other platforms are either pressed into service on the Russian side, put on display in parks and exhibitions — and trumpeted as proof Ukraine and the West are losing against Russia.
The much-vaunted main battle tank has not achieved the kind of decisive breakthrough through the front lines that Ukrainian forces had initially hoped it would.
Instead, that war’s front lines have stagnated and regressed into a World War One-style trench slugfest, albeit one with satellite imagery, drone offensives, and other modern additions to the now-familiar trench.
Ukraine operates a very diverse fleet of weapon systems, and its main battle tanks are no exception. In addition to the early Cold War-era German Leopard I tanks, the Ukrainian military also operates newer Leopard II main battle tanks, as well as their legacy Soviet armored platforms, such as the T-72 and T-80, the British Challenger, and more modern American kit, including the M1A1 Abrams main battle tank.
Some of that equipment has been captured and put on display in Russia, proof, according to the authorities, that Russia is winning the fight and that victory is inevitable.
Those images are certainly a propaganda win for the Kremlin, but is captured Western military kit proof-positive that Ukraine is losing? Hardly.
A Remarkable Interview
One Ukrainian Abrams commander from Ukraine’s 47th Mechanized Brigade spoke about the Abrams’ qualities, as well as aspects of the design that he says saved his and his crew’s lives. “That’s our tank,” the commander said in reference to videos of Russia’s drones hitting the tank.
“But they only posted two of the strikes. Yesterday [from last week] was the first time that the crew survived multiple hits while inside a disabled Abrams. Actually, there were 4-6 direct hits. The crew survived, and even without injuries. God bless America.”
The Abrams crew absorbed “between four and six hits within like 2 minutes. I believe that at least one more got stuck in the net. Two more missed several minutes before.” Additionally, the most valuable advantage of the Abrams is that, when having MUCH additional armour and a thorough approach, it saves human lives, even in DIRE conditions,” the commander explained.
However, he did offer a critique of the tank, saying that “If the US provided the tanks with the original armour and the complete ARAT 1/2 kits, this would make us more protected (although the top would still remain unprotected and we would need Kontakt-1, etc.).”
One of the great strengths of tanks like the Abrams and other Western main battle tanks is the storage of ammunition in a separate blowout compartment, separate from the crew. In the event of the tank’s ammunition exploding catastrophically, the blast of the explosion is directed outward and away from the crew. Tanks can be replaced. Tankers, on the other hand, are much more difficult to replace.
Not the First Time, and Likely not the Last
Russia has captured — and displayed — a plethora of captured Western military equipment already before.
At an open-air exhibition in Moscow’s Victory Park, military equipment is displayed, but “has nothing to do with World War Two,” the BBC’s Steve Rosenberg reported from Russia over a year ago. “On display is Western military hardware captured by the Russian army in Ukraine. They are war trophies and Russia has decided to flaunt them. Among the armour here is a British Army Husky tactical support vehicle which had been donated to Ukraine. Its windscreen is covered in bullet-holes.”
“Opposite the Husky I can see Western tanks that had been transferred to the Ukrainian military,” Rosenberg wrote. “There’s an American Abrams which had been damaged on the battlefield. A German Leopard tank, too. In fact, there’s a long line of German armour. And above it a sign: “History is repeating itself.”
Useful Trophies? Probably Not.
The United States and other Western countries have donated a variety of military equipment, including small arms, ammunition, air defense systems and missiles, main battle tanks, armored fighting vehicles, as well as other pieces of kit.
Disparate though those systems are, they all share one thing in common, irrespective of what their country of manufacture or origin is. None of the hardware given to Ukraine is at the bleeding technological edge of weaponry.
Instead, extensive though Western donations have been — not to mention vital for keeping the Kremlin’s forces at bay in Ukraine — the kit supplied has been, on occasion, equipment pulled out of storage, quickly retired for donation to Ukraine, or otherwise Cold War-era legacy systems, with a few exceptions.
The logic behind this calculus is cold but clear: what should happen if some of the West’s leading systems fall into Russian hands, say, due to running out of fuel or becoming disabled in battle? Those systems would more likely than not be intensely analyzed and reverse-engineered to be mined for their secrets.
NATO-Style Warfare
The reality is that NATO forces would not fight the war in Ukraine today the way Ukrainian forces are. For one, the Ukrainian Air Force is dwarfed by the air forces of the West, and NATO ground elements would not attempt to fight without support from the air, if not outright air superiority.
Tanker crews in the United States and other NATO countries undergo months of training before achieving initial qualifications. This stands in stark contrast to the amount of training that Ukrainian tankers crews are given. When considered within the larger operational context, it is little wonder that some American Abrams, German Leopard IIs, and the British Challengers have all been captured by Russia, given the significant disparities in training and support those Ukrainian tanker crews have by comparison.
About the Author: Caleb Larson
Caleb Larson is an American multiformat journalist based in Berlin, Germany. His work covers the intersection of conflict and society, focusing on American foreign policy and European security. He has reported from Germany, Russia, and the United States. Most recently, he covered the war in Ukraine, reporting extensively on the war’s shifting battle lines from Donbas and writing on the war’s civilian and humanitarian toll. Previously, he worked as a Defense Reporter for POLITICO Europe. You can follow his latest work on X.
Russia’s Bomber Forces
Tu-22M3: The Bomber Ukraine Hit With Drones
Pingback: A Russia-NATO War Could Begin in 5 Years - National Security Journal
Pingback: The Army's M1 Abrams Tanks Explained in 1 Word - National Security Journal